Unions Wait 36 Hours to Bargain, BART a No Show

We Make BART Work [ATU 1555] - Sun, 10/11/2015 - 23:44
Plans move forward for Monday strike

Negotiators for the two unions representing the majority of BART workers announced this evening that they are walking out of negotiations after 40 hours without a single new economic proposal from agents representing BART’s elected Board of Directors.

The negotiating teams for both unions waited in the bargaining room all day Saturday at the request of the mediator assigned to oversee bargaining, but management negotiators never showed up.  Similar stalling on BART’s part took place on Friday as well.

“BART management is engaging in what is called ‘surface bargaining,’” said Josie Mooney, spokesperson for SEIU 1021. “They’re trying to appear in public like they are working to keep the trains running, but they’re doing nothing to respond to good-faith offers by BART workers aimed at avoiding a strike.”

BART workers and the public were hoping for smoother labor  negotiations, with the system now projecting an average surplus of $125 million per year over the next ten years.  BART has refused to present a certified budget for negotiators to work with throughout the process, and seem to have no intention of doing so.

“These past three months were never about contract negotiations for BART, they were about politics,” says Antonette Bryant, president of Amalgamated Transit Union. “The people of the Bay Area deserve better. They – and we – will have to bear the brunt of BART’s political charade. All we’ve asked for is a fair wage and a safe work environment.”



Members of Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) 1555 are available for interviews.

Antonette Bryant
President and Business Agent
510-763-1555 x12
(cell) 925-565-8118

Chris Finn
Recording Secretary

BART on the upswing, workers left behind

Fact sheet on BART rising revenue, ridership and stagnant wages for BART workers Contact information

132 Ninth St. Suite 100
Oakland, CA 94607

Phone: 1-800-559-2625
Fax: 510-763-1436

Media Requests

Members of Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) 1555 are available for interviews and comment.


Categories: Labor News, Unions

Labor for Bernie

IBU - Fri, 10/09/2015 - 17:51
In These Times · http://www.inthesetimes.com August 12, 2015 Union Members Seem To Want Bernie Sanders Over Hillary Clinton. Will Labor Leadership Follow Them?   BY Mario Vasquez Sen.
Categories: Unions

PSR Fleet Memo for October 3 2015

IBU - Tue, 10/06/2015 - 10:08
Categories: Unions

Language workers got Tallents!

IWW - Wed, 09/30/2015 - 19:11

By Angry Language - LibCom.Org, September 27, 2015

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s.

Ultimately, we were forced to go down the legal route. That means that IWW members at LSSE only got the legal minimum, despite our belief that the callous mistreatment we suffered while at the school entitled us to further compensation. In any case, we got more than Craig had ever planned to give us.

We're proud to say that in our effort to make Craig pay up, the workers ran militant and well-organised campaign. We occupied the school. We forced Craig to resign as a governor of the Bancroft School and to shut down the website of another one of his business interests, Asparagus Consulting. We hassled him at his residents' association. We held numerous pickets and protests in Leicester Square and at the Drapers' Guild, where Craig is a member of some note – actions which did not go unnoticed by senior officers of the organisation.

To any other workers who may ever have the misfortune to work for Craig, we have a message for you: if he mistreats you in any way, you've got the support of the Angry Language Brigade and the IWW. It doesn't matter if you're a language school worker or not; if Craig's your boss, we got your back.

And let this be a message to any future would-be business partners: Craig Tallents is a toxic asset. Besides his consistently underhanded business practices, he's got two organisations who are ready and willing to picket and protest anywhere he sets up shop.

Jon Bigger, the IWW caseworker who helped the workers, said “this case was a good example of a boss trying to hide when the going got tough. Future workers and business partners of Craig Tallents will no doubt take note of his actions. Bosses should take note of ours.”

For those who've followed the dispute, one of the key issues was that Craig had illegally and intentionally misclassified a number of teachers as self-employed. This meant that when Craig shut down the school, he thought he could do so without paying those teachers thousands of pounds in holiday and notice pay.

The good news is that if you've been misclassified – a major problem in language schools – you have recourse. Raise it collectively with your workmates or contact HMRC who can contact your employer to make them sort out their records and pay you any back pay to which you may be entitled. HMRC can be contacted anonymously, but it's probably best if you have someone like a union rep call on your behalf.

read more

Categories: Unions

US Labor Law at 80: the Enduring Relevance of Class Struggle Unionism

IWW - Wed, 09/30/2015 - 19:04

By Immanuel Ness - CounterPunch, September 22, 2015

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s.

By embracing collective bargaining through the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935, or Wagner Act, organized labor deprived workers of their capacity to contest private and state power. This compromise closed out any possibility of building a mass-based labor movement for decades. Rather than advancing the interests of workers, the NLRA circumscribed workers’ aspirations for democratic syndicalist and autonomist unions.

IWW: Alternative to Contract Unionism

In examining the long-term failure of organized labor, we must first note the alternative, organic, autonomous workers’ movement embodied in particular by unions affiliated with the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) in the early 20th century. From its inception in 1905 until the 1920’s, the IWW represented a significant alternative to contract unionism. The IWW stood for the solidarity of all workers and it was fiercely opposed for that reason — by capital, by reformists such as Daniel DeLeon of the Socialist Labor Party and by the American Federation of Labor (AFL).[i] The IWW engaged in a genuine form of democracy and a mass industrial organizing model ultimately adopted by the AFL and the Congress of Industrial Organization (CIO), which both utilized for very different purposes.[ii]

The IWW employed sabotage, direct action and strikes through the equivalent of workers’ councils in both the community and at the point of production, while disavowing the legitimacy of the state and recognizing that any agreement with business must be temporary. The Wobblies vigorously negotiated with employers but were never deluded that agreements would bring labor peace.

That the solidarity of all workers was not just talk for the IWW is evidenced by their organization of Blacks, immigrant workers from Mexico and Southeast Asia, and women in, for example, the Bread and Roses Strike. Historian Peter Cole has richly demonstrated that the IWW embraced multiracial unionism, perhaps most notably in Philadelphia’s Maritime Workers Local 8, where Black workers maintained a majority.iii

The IWW achieved major gains for U.S. workers into the 1930s while (and because) it emphasized solidarity and workers’ control. When AFL and CIO unions expanded dramatically as a result of upheaval that began in the early 1930’s, they, by contrast, mostly failed to stimulate enthusiasm among workers. Riding the massive wave of sit-down strikes to positions of power, leaders of insurgent unions contributed greatly to sublimating the continuation of such militancy by throwing their support behind modest and incomplete New Deal reforms that ultimately weakened the capacity of workers to confront capital directly. In the area of labor relations, the NLRA was the fulcrum.

Many workers who participated in the sit-down strikes in mass production industries considered unionization synonymous with control over the enterprise, as was recognized immediately by capital. Given the breadth and ongoing militancy of the labor upheaval, the most astute corporate leaders soon expressed willingness to yield select rights provided that employer absolutism in the workplace was maintained. The NLRA proved to be the mechanism for doing so and responsible labor leaders proved willing junior partners in quelling worker militancy. For approximately a year after the wave of sit-down strikes, many workers were surprised to learn that their unions, as sanctioned by the NLRA, set up a framework that restricted their autonomy.

In his account of the Flint sit-down strikes, Sidney Fine wrote of how UAW members “were reluctant to accept the customary discipline exercised by management” and “ran wild in many plants for months.” Union committeemen aggressively pressed the grievances of union members upon oftentimes unyielding foremen, and as a UAW member later conceded, “Every time a dispute came up the fellows would have a tendency to sit down and just stop working.”iv

read more

Categories: Unions


IBU - Wed, 09/30/2015 - 11:48
Categories: Unions

NLRB Rules Union Canvasser Fired Illegally By Sisters’ Camelot, Orders Back Pay, Reinstatement

IWW - Mon, 09/28/2015 - 14:52

This past Friday, September 25, the National Labor Relations Board issued a new ruling regarding the struggle between the IWW Sisters’ Camelot Canvass Union and their former bosses at Sisters’ Camelot.

This new ruling reverses the 2013 ruling by an administrative law judge which stated the workers at Sisters’ Camelot were not protected under the National labor Relations Act because they were independent contractors. With this decision being reversed, Sisters’ Camelot is ruled to have violated labor law when they fired Canvass Union member shugE Mississippi while on strike in 2013 as part of their union-busting campaign.

This new ruling also uses the same argument to clarify that Sisters’ Camelot violated labor law when they refused to negotiate with their worker’s union, and again when they offered concessions to workers if they were to abandon bargaining collectively as a union.

read more

Categories: Unions

There will be no unpaid workers at the Co-op!

IWW - Sun, 09/20/2015 - 13:29

By Dorsett IWW - Dorsett IWW, September 17, 2015

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s.

Dorset IWW General Members’ Branch is pleased to announce that our dispute with a Bournemouth outlet of the Co-operative has been settled amicably. We have a verbal assurance from local management who are USDAW members, that they have no wish to exploit unpaid workers on their premises, and that their connection with ‘Prospects’ has been severed. We congratulate them on their principled decision and affirm our commitment to defeat the government’s work programme and end unpaid labour.

Nationally however, the situation is less clear; we have had sight of a Co-op internal document that sets out the parameters of their unpaid work experience programme. Whilst it insists that placements must be voluntary and offer meaningful experience, we note that vulnerable adults are being conscripted who may not be fully aware of their rights. It’s highly likely some of them will not be able to make an informed decision and/or will get browbeaten by jobcentre staff with targets to meet. Once they are on the scheme if they leave they may be deemed to have made themselves intentionally unemployed, and be sanctioned. Lastly of course, however you dress it up, it’s unpaid labour. How long does it take to assess a person’s suitability for working in a grocer’s shop? A week, two? Why then should a national chain not speculate a fortnight’s minimum wage to find out?

read more

Categories: Unions

Friedrichs v. CTA: the Supreme Court Case That Could Destroy Labor Unions as We Know Them

IWW - Sun, 09/20/2015 - 13:18

By Andrew Stewart - CounterPunch, September 18, 2015

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s.

This Presidential campaign has become even more of a media spectacle than the last two were, which in and of itself proves our electoral system is broken because the voters treat governance like professional wrestling. The Republican field is so close to a Vince McMahon Slam-O-Rama match that we do not even need to come up with silly stage names for these doofuses.

But what stuns me most about the Democratic field is that, even in the midst of our kinda-sorta dialogue about democratic socialism brought about by the Sanders dog-and-pony show, not a single candidate has yet to talk about the cornerstone of a socialist society, our barely-breathing labor unions. We have heard news stories about everyone’s favorite walrus, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, coming down from on high and reminding the masses that he, not they, get to choose whether the unions endorse Sanders or Clinton. But the elephant in the room which no one is talking about is the Friedrichs v. CTA Supreme Court case, which has seen the Petitioner Brief filed on September 4, 2015, followed by nineteen amicus curiae briefs on September 10 and. For those just tuning in, this is the case that will destroy labor unions as we know them in our country. This omission from our national dialogue is analogous to the three months before 9-11 when everyone was telling President Bush that something was going to happen but he was too busy farting around on his ranch to care.

read more

Categories: Unions

Porn, Sex Positivity, and Working Class Solidarity

IWW - Sun, 09/20/2015 - 13:09

By Kasparkonsequent - Red and Black Leeds, September 18, 2015

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s.

The UK’s gradually expanding porn law restrictions have been going on for years and eventually came to a climax the end of 2014, when previously existing restrictions were applied to all pornographic material made in the UK. Though I still see the occasional protest against this, and a few campaigners are still trying to overturn it, the flurry of outrage has largely died down. My aim here is not to defend the ban, but to critique the way this has been discussed, so we might be able to distinguish in future between what some members of the public want the sex industry to be, and an expression of working class solidarity towards those of us who work in it.

It’s obvious to most people that the list of banned acts represents pure moralising, and that the people who made this list seem to have a particular idea of what normal sex is and should be (part of which, as a number of people have noted, seems to be based on the idea that sex is something that women do for men). The legislation is clearly not about what should or shouldn’t happen on a porn set, but is entirely about what should be depicted and how. This is no mistake, the changes are part of the Obscene Publications Act, designed to outlaw any material that “tends to deprave and corrupt”. The fact that some of the banned acts are also things that many workers will want to avoid at work is coincidental and not the purpose of the ban. This becomes apparent when we see that vomiting, for example from facefucking, is something that is acceptable “if it is not performed as part of the sexual act, and is not visibly enjoyed by the participants”. The important phrase is “visibly enjoyed”, as the issue is not whether or not the worker is actually enjoying having the back of their throat hit until they vomit, but whether or not they have the inclination or acting ability to portray someone who does enjoy it. And according to the OPA they should not appear to enjoy it as it might give people watching the idea that this could be fun. However if your work involves occasional uncontrolled vomiting and you look suitably unimpressed by it when it happens, then as far as this legislation is concerned that’s fine and nothing to worry about.

Whether consciously or not, a lot of the responses to this have mirrored the same attitude in the sense that they’ve not been about what the work is like for those people having sex on camera, but about what consumers think should or shouldn’t be depicted, and how it should be represented, and what porn should look like to portray sex in a certain way to society. Progressives all over the UK have complained that they want female pleasure to be depicted and so are against the ban on female ejaculation, that they want women to be shown as empowered in sex and so are against the ban on face-sitting, that they want a variety of sexual acts to be represented so we aren’t conditioned to masturbate only to the same tired misogynistic porn formula. This is fair enough. It’s not only films and high art that influence our society and how we think, but all the media we consume. Even if all the porn actors on set were to be bored out of their minds, hate each other, and feel disgusted by the thought of having to get it on for the camera, if they produce a work of fiction that depicts the healthy negotiating of consent, where the people having sex are smiling at each other while on camera, where women are portrayed as having their own sexual desires, that could have a positive affect on people watching it.

read more

Categories: Unions

Longshore Workers Vote to Oppose Coal Exports in Oakland

ILWU - Fri, 09/18/2015 - 15:18

SAN FRANCISCO, CA (September 18, 2015) – Longshore workers and marine clerks who have moved cargo at the Ports of Oakland and San Francisco since 1934 have rejected a developer’s plan to export coal through former Oakland Army Base. International Longshore and Warehouse Union elected officials say coal is an undesirable, low-value cargo and a broken promise on the part of the developer, and longshore workers are standing by community members who do not want the worry and risks of nine million tons of coal passing through their neighborhoods on trains each year. After much research and discussion, the rank and file members of ILWU Local 10 and ILWU Local 34 have voted to oppose the handling of coal at the site.

“When the developers of the project were seeking tax money and public support to develop the Oakland Army Base, they talked about exporting cargoes like grain and potash,” said Sean Farley, President of ILWU Local 34. “They made a ‘no coal’ promise to workers, the community and elected officials, and they need to make good on that promise. Waterfront space is in short supply on the West Coast, and it would be a mistake to lock Oakland into a decades-long lease with a coal industry that many say is dying. Coal proposals have failed up and down the West Coast, and Oakland shouldn’t become the dumping ground for dirty, low value cargoes that no one else wants.”

After the Oakland City Council granted the California Capital and Investment Group (CCIG) the right to develop the former army base adjacent to the Port of Oakland, CCIG planned to build the Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal (OBOT) on the site. CCIG has since turned its “no coal” promise into a “coal or nothing” threat, claiming no other cargo will pay the bills. Meanwhile, other West Coast ports are thriving while exporting products like grain, potash, soda ash, salt, and other commodities and bulk products.

“Coal is not the right way to bring jobs to Oakland,” said ILWU Local 10 Business Agent Derrick Muhammad. “Oakland families are already worried about asthma and other sickness because of highways and port activities. It’s not right to ask them to take on the worry and risk of nine million tons of coal passing through their neighborhoods on trains each year. If the developers haven’t found a cleaner, safer product yet, they owe it to the City of Oakland to make good on their promise and keep looking. They’ll find better cargoes if they are truly committed to bringing good, safe jobs to our community.”

The International Longshore and Warehouse Union’s Coast Longshore Division represents approximately 25,000 longshore men and women in 30 West Coast ports from San Diego, CA, to Bellingham, WA.

Categories: Unions

Call for Submissions: In November We Remember Industrial Worker

IWW - Thu, 09/17/2015 - 20:05

Fall is just around the corner, which means it's time for the annual "In November We Remember" issue of the Industrial Worker (which will technically be the Fall 2015 issue now that we've switched to quarterly). NOW is the time to begin discussing with your branches/groups how you will commemorate fallen comrades with messages of solidarity for all the world to see: and for the first time ever you can do it in COLOR, or RED & BLACK! That's right -- there will be pages set aside for full color ads, as well as for red-and-black ads.

The deadline is Friday, October 2, 2015. Email your submissions to iw@iww.org.

read more

Categories: Unions

Production Services Collective workers Join IWW iu630

IWW - Mon, 09/14/2015 - 17:29

Production Services Collective declaration to the ownership of Sound Stage Systems:

For nearly a year, as fellow workers, we have organized ourselves, put forth proposals, met and negotiated with you, the ownership and management of Sound Stage Systems. We have done these things in an attempt to create a democratic work place and a functional system of working that is inclusive, promotes creativity, compensates fairly and sees the value in cooperation rather than the unsustainable spiral of competition.

Our proposals have been met with varying degrees of enthusiasm and hostility. Weekly staff meetings have been attempted and some proposals implemented. Some workers have negotiated better wages on a one on one basis only to find the overtime they expected was now unattainable. Profit over substance has become the mode of operation. Clients' needs have been swept aside as cost over runs are hurriedly “funded’ and new avenues of profit are exploited. New hires have been intimidated with the threat of firing during probation periods. Workers old and new have been “talked to” regarding trivial matters in an apparent attempt to intimidate. An atmosphere of intolerance for dissenting views, alternate methods, procedures and social/work culture is present daily.

We find ourselves in a continuous cycle of emotional and economic boom and bust. Daily we experience the torturous trickle down from a system that disregards our contributions and rights to self-determination and fair compensation. We have determined the only way out of this cycle and into routine control of our lives and movement forward lies in solidarity with workers locally and around the world who struggle daily to form the structures of a new way to work and live within the shell of the old.

It is with this in mind that we proudly declare ourselves members of the Industrial Workers of the World and move to build a work environment that fairly addresses the needs of client, worker and owner.

Before we can continue work on existing projects and before the discussion of work on new projects, we demand that you, the ownership and management of Sound Stage Systems, recognize us, the workers of Sound Stage Systems, as members of IWW IU630 (The Industrial Workers of the World, industrial union 630) and allow us the space to create a more democratic work place.

With a fresh prospective from this new owner/worker dynamic, we can discuss the details of the following additional demands;

  • 1) that as members of IWW IU630 we are given access to and input in every aspect of our role as workers on any project.
  • 2) That as members of IWW IU630 we are the first to be responsible for the training, review and assignment to departments of any member or new hire for any project.
  • 3) That as members of IWW IU630 we receive equal pay for equal work based on a four tier pay scale.
  • 4) That travel project notifications will be a minimum of two weeks prior to booking.
  • 5) That an open system for review and conflict resolution is established with no less than two IWW IU630 members present at any meeting.

We are no longer willing to participate in or make excuses for substandard work that is produced by a system beyond our control. We are dedicated to providing the best products and services in this industry. Within this new framework we are confident we can achieve this and create a work environment that will elevate every project Sound Stage System involves itself in, to this level and beyond.

read more

Categories: Unions

Angel Island Ferry Workers

IBU - Mon, 09/14/2015 - 15:09
We have been pursuing legislation for the last 3 years and the bill is finally on the Governor's deck.  We are hopeful he will sign it.
Categories: Unions

PSR Fleet Memo for September 12 2015

IBU - Mon, 09/14/2015 - 11:47
Categories: Unions

Sign up for our Introduction to the IWW class!

IWW - Sun, 09/13/2015 - 11:24
Thursday, October 1, from 7:00-8:30pm

All workers welcome! Learn more about the key principles and values of the Industrial Workers of the World and learn what the Portland I.W.W. is doing to improve working conditions – and how you can get involved.

We will explore solidarity unionism, the use of direct action, how the I.W.W. differs from business & trade unions, and more.

Click here to sign up!

For those of you who utilize Facebook: The Intro Class event page

read more

Categories: Unions

Hotel Frank(enstein) becomes Hotel G(oofy)

IWW - Sun, 09/13/2015 - 11:17

By Marc Norton - Marc Norton Online, September 8, 2015

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s. The author is a member of the Bay Area IWW General Membership Branch and UNITEHERE Local 2.

Almost five years after I was illegally fired from my job as a bellman at Hotel Frank, the current owners of the Union Square hotel at Geary and Mason (now called Hotel G) are telling guests that there is no luggage service, that if they want to get their bags to or from their rooms they are on their own, and that if they want to store their luggage there is a roped-off area in the lobby where they can dump their bags, without any guarantee that they will be there when they want to retrieve them.

Hotel management recently instituted this goofy practice in order to keep me from coming back to work at the hotel.  Quite a backhanded complement to my perceived organizing and troublemaking ability, don’t you think?

Here is an email that Matthew Rubenstein, the Associate Sales & Social Media Manager at Hotel G, sent to a potential guest:

We do have a place in the lobby where you can store the luggage – it is a roped-off area by the front desk.  Unfortunately we cannot transport the bags up to the room.

And this, also from Mr. Rubenstein, responding to a question about the security of the “roped-off area” in the lobby:

Personally, if it were me I would be fine leaving anything outside of laptops/cameras etc.

Here is a photo of the “roped-off area” in the lobby.  Note that there is a woman, presumably a hotel guest, going through some of the stored luggage:

Note that the luggage is blocking a doorway.  That is the door to the stairs from the basement, where the housekeeping office and the employee break room are located.  With this door blocked, the only access to the basement is via the elevator.  I wonder what the Fire Marshal might think of this.

read more

Categories: Unions

Gunkist Oranges

IWW - Sun, 09/13/2015 - 10:35

By Gustavo Arellano - Orange County Weekly, June 8, 2006

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are not the official position of the IWW and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s.


Seventy years ago this week, Orange County’s most brutally suppressed strike began with a bite.

On June 15, 1936, at the break of dawn, about 200 Mexican women gathered in Anaheim to preach the gospel of huelga—strike. Four days earlier, about 2,500 Mexican naranjeros representing more than half of Orange County’s crucial citrus-picking force dropped their clippers, bags and ladders to demand higher wages, better working conditions and the right to unionize.

The women spread across the groves of Anaheim, the heart of citrus country, urging workers to let the fruit hang. Twenty Anaheim police officers confronted the women; they refused to disperse. At some point there was an altercation, and 29-year-old Placentia resident Virginia Torres bit the arm of Anaheim police officer Roger Sherman. Police arrested Torres, along with 30-year-old Epifania Marquez, who tried to yank a strikebreaker—a scab—from a truck by grabbing onto his suspenders.

Little else is known about the Fort Sumter of Orange County—newspaper accounts say only that Torres and Marquez received jail sentences of 60 and 30 days, respectively. But Orange County responded with an organized wrath years in the planning. Growers enlisted the local chapters of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and American Legion to guard fields. They evicted families of strikers from their company-owned houses. The English-language press became a bulletin board for the growers—The Santa Ana Register, for instance, described the 200 Mexican women in Anaheim as “Amazons with fire of battle in their eyes.”

Orange County Sheriff Logan Jackson deputized citrus orchard guards and provided them with steel helmets, shotguns and ax handles. The newly minted cops began arresting strikers en masse, more than 250 by strike’s end. When that didn’t stop the strike, they reported workers to federal immigration authorities. When that didn’t work, out came the guns and clubs. Tear gas blossomed in the groves. Mobs of citrus farmers and their supporters attacked under cover of darkness.

What county residents tried to dismiss as a fruitless strike quickly escalated into a full-fledged civil war in which race and class were inseparable. The Mexicans of Orange County, the county’s historical source of cheap labor, were finally asking for better working conditions; their gabacho overlords wouldn’t hear it. And so both sides fought for a month until the lords of Orange County won.

Wonder why Orange County trembles whenever its Mexicans protest? Welcome to the Citrus War of 1936, the most important event in Orange County history you’ve never heard of.

read more

Categories: Unions

Fleet Memo for September 5 2015

IBU - Tue, 09/08/2015 - 14:12
Categories: Unions

Fleet Memo for August 29 2015

IBU - Wed, 09/02/2015 - 13:16
Categories: Unions


Subscribe to Transport Workers Solidarity Committee aggregator - Unions